Why did Brigham Young believe Adam was God?

[_Daheshist]

There is absolutely NO doubt that Brigham Young taught Adam-God as a doctrine and Revelation. He taught all during his reign. Orson Pratt opposed it, and was demoted in the Council of 12, and had to "eat crow" and give a cow-towed speech before the Council reiterating his loyalty to Brigham. Had he not done that, he probably would have been tossed from the Council completely. Pratt was supposed to be the next President after Brigham Young, but because Orson disagreed with Adam-God, he was bounced to last place in the Council (now called Quorum of 12). This is very, very documented by DIALOGUE and other publications. And Orson was like, "Please, just explain it to me, because to me it seems to contradict the Revelations. Please, just explain it and I will be at peace!" Well, Brigham Young had no intention explaining it! He painted himself into a corner when he introduced Adam-God in 1852, was "committed" to it, did not want the embarrassment of saying he was wrong, and all else be damned!

Members who are excommunicated, for example, if they oppose a certain doctrine, they are warned, then if they continue they are exed for "unchristianlike conduct" or "apostasy" or "teaching false doctrine". You'll never "see" anything saying, "Joe Schmoe was excommunicated for opposing the Curse of Cain Doctrine". You won't find that. The Church does not get that specific. I know of a girl who was excommunicated for "unchristianlike conduct" because she wrote a letter of resignation, and said in it that if the Church exed her and did not accept her resignation letter, she would sue them. So, they exed her.

The Brethren are slowly but surely "weaning" away the Members from the legacy of Brigham Young: blood atonement, God had sex with Mary, Negroes cursed, but without condemning ole Brigham himself. They can't condemn him as a preacher of false doctrine! They can't. They are his successors. Its a "Catch 22" situation. So, they will have their cake and eat it too: they will declare all his doctrines "false" while at the same time maintaining that he was a Prophet and the rightful successor of Joseph Smith. Which is ironic, because Brigham Young denied he was a Prophet and the rightful successor of JOseph Smith....in General Conference. But you'll never read THAT in a Church Manual!!! The Brethren want it both ways, and, as usual, that's what they will get.

[_consiglieri]

I am looking for historical accounts of people were excommunicated in BY's time that opposed his Adam/God doctrine.

It wasn't Buchanan, it was Bunker. And he didn't get excommunicated, just his hand slapped by Wilford Woodruff.

In late 1890, 1891, 1892, Bishop Edward Bunker Jr. and his father, Edward Bunker Sr. of Bunkerville, Utah, and his counselor Myron Abbot were before church courts. The Bunkers denied Adam-God doctrine; Abbott accepted it. The final High Council Court was held June 11, 1892, and was attended by President Wilford Woodruff and his first counselor, George Q. Cannon. In summary, the Bunkers had their hands slapped for advancing false doctrine and “indulging in mysteries.” Bunker Sr. was advised “to let these things alone.” Abbott, who supported Adam-God doctrine, was cautioned to not become “puffed up in pride” over the victory. See Adam-God Maze, pp. 215-238 for the sources covering the above. Also Unpublished Revelations, pp. 168-175.

http://www.caic.org.au/theology/adam-god.htm

So, in short, I think it is probably going to be difficult to document anybody actually being excommunicated for believing the Adam-God Theory.

Here it is interesting that as late as 1892 it was the people who denied the Adam-God Theory who were sanctioned.

I suppose if some Mormon got up today and started preaching it and refused to stop even after being advised to shut up, they might well get excommunicated.

But I know of no such instances.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri